A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DESCARTES’ BASIC BELIEFS AND CHISHOLM’S SELF-PRESENTING THESIS

E. O. AKINTONA

Abstract


Traditionally, knowledge is classified as “Justified True Belief†but for the problem of infinite regress, Descartes came up with an indubitable foundation upon which he believes secured knowledge could be established. There were several incursions of epistemological problems associated with the justification of foundationalism and many versions ranging from the classical to coherentism and foundherentism eventually emerged, but, none was without its embedded problems. Chisholm however came up with a version of foundationalism, a development over Cartesian foundationalism, based on the principles of self-presenting to solve the problem of infallibility and indubitability. The “self-presenting†is an improved version of the Cartessian basic beliefs. Therefore, this paper attempts a comparative analysis of the Cartesian basic beliefs and Chisholm’s “self-presenting†thesis using the philosophical analytical and conceptual methods to determine how successful Chisholm has been in his exploit.

 


Keywords


Basic Beliefs, Coherentism, Self-presenting, Justification, Knowledge

Full Text:

PDF

References


Audi, Robert. 1998. Epistemology. London: Routledge.

Armstrong, D. M. 1979. Belief, Truth and Knowledge. London: Cambridge University Press

Bonjour, Laurence. 1980. “Externalist Theories on Empirical Knowledge†in French, P. A. etal (ed.) Midwest Studies in Philosophy V (ed.) Peter A. French, et al. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis

--------------------------. 1985. The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.

Chisholm, R. M. 1957. Perceiving: A Philosophical Study, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Chisholm, R. M. 1975. “A version of Foundationalism†in Dancy (1985) Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology, Cambridge: Basel Blackwell.

Dancy, Jonathan. 1985. Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology. Cambridge:

Basel Blackwell.

Descartes, Rene. 1931. Discourses on Method, trans. by E. S. Haldene and G. R. T. Ross, in The Philosophical Works of Descartes vol. 1. London: Cambridge University Press.

Fogelin, Robert, 1994. Pyrrhonian Reflections on Knowledge and Justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Firth, Roderick, 1967. “The Anatomy of Certaintyâ€. Philosophical Review. vol. 76:3-27.

Gettier, Edmund L. 1963. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge†Analysis, vol. 23,

no. 6, June, 121-123.

Jeshion, Robin. 2000. “On the Obviousâ€. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. vol. 60: 333-55.

Kekes, John. 1977. “The Recent Trends and Future Prospects in Epistemologyâ€

Philosophy, vol. 3, nos 2& 3. April/July.

Keynes, John Maynard. 1952. A Treatise on Probability. London: Oxford University Press.

Lehrer, Keith. 1974. Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

-------------------. 1994. Theory of Knowledge. Boulder, CO: West view Press.

Van Cleve, James. 1977. “Probability and Certainty: A Re-examination of the Lewis-Reichenbach Debateâ€, Philosophical Studies, 32: 323 –334

Sosa, Earnest. 1980. “The Raft and the Pyramid: Coherence Versus Foundation in the Theory of Knowledge†in Midwest Studies in Philosophy V (eds.) Peter A French et al.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.